Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More California insanity.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • wolfhnd
    replied
    Milton Friedman corrects some widely held myths.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNc-xhH8kkk&t=1802s

    The myth he doesn't discuss is one that in a weird sort of way both the left and right share. To paraphrase Jordan Peterson the right believes there is a job for everyone if they just tried harder and the left believes that anyone can be trained to do most jobs. Increasingly as society becomes more complex both are wrong. 20 percent of the population has an IQ that makes productive employment challenging.

    Another myth he doesn't address is that rugged individualism conquered the west. Free land granted to the railroads by the government made the western railroads marginally profitable and free land granted to migrants made populating the west possible. Would we have been better off if over a longer period of time market forces had driven the process, that is another discussion because that is not what happened.

    I could go on discussing the things Friedman doesn't discuss but I'm only interested in one issue. That both the left and the right fail to see the cause of social failure which is the failure of individuals to adopt an ethical code of individual responsibility for the long term interests of society. One side believes ethics will collectively evolve and the other that they should be collectively imposed. Both sides also believe that it is an educational problem. I would argue it is not so much an educational problem a failure of the belief in the future over multiple generations and a lack of respect for the contributions of past generations.

    There seems to be a natural decline in ethics related to luxus. It is not luxury specifically but excess. The relationship between excess and necessity, the trivial and practical. Meanings change in relationship to environment and with meaning values.

    Leave a comment:


  • wolfhnd
    replied
    The difference between tangible wealth and money is important when discussing economics. Money lubricates the machinery that generates wealth but the two should not be confused. The meaning of money changes dependent on where it is located but wealth much less so.

    Money is an abstraction much as the arbitrary line that separates Southern California from Mexico. Taking money across that arbitrary line changes it's meaning. On one side of the border it generates wealth on the other it generates cartels and social chaos. What turned similar patches of desert into different worlds is infrastructure in the form of transportation systems, water projects, educational systems, cheap energy and free markets.

    California now ranks 42d in highways, has severe water shortages, ranks 37th in primary and secondary schools, has the 44th highest electricity costs, and highly regulated markets. All things that California once lead the nation in.

    What California has is the best higher education system in the world. Unfortunately for California the meaning of education is likely to radically change over the next few decades as progressive policies degrade the value of a University Education while at the same time the internet erodes the meaning of physical location. Many of the things that made California wealthy are increasingly portable not just education but industries such as Silicon Valley and entertainment. Silicon valley and the entertainment industry could just as easily be in India today.

    What California had and no longer has is a vision of the future. Previous generations defied the environmental movement to build a water system for the future, a highway system that had room to grow, an educational system focused on excellence not diversity, an electrical grid that allowed for growth, a population eager to build new industries and a vision of what was wrong with it's neighbor to the south.

    ​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by AdrianE View Post

    Your math is wrong. GDP/person is $/population. You did the inverse.
    California works out to approximately 69K$ per person and Arizona 42K$/per person.
    Californians are 64% more productive than Arizonans.

    Your analysis is wrong and your conclusions are wrong as they are based on erroneous analysis.
    I have to wonder how many of your other deeply held beliefs are equally based on bad data or incorrect analysis.

    Most of them imo. Usually long winds but just a breeze with little in them.

    Leave a comment:


  • AdrianE
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Yes, California is #1 in population and GDP (39,776,830-- $2,746,873 millions) versus Arizona being #14 in pop and #21 in GDP (7,530,552 -- $319,850 millions)

    But, when you divide population by GDP to get the GDP per person in the state.... Arizona gets $23.54 versus California's $14.48. That is, Arizona is nearly TWICE as productive as California. No wonder... Between massive regulations, high taxes, and a large population on welfare, California isn't very productive for its massive size.
    Your math is wrong. GDP/person is $/population. You did the inverse.
    California works out to approximately 69K$ per person and Arizona 42K$/per person.
    Californians are 64% more productive than Arizonans.

    Your analysis is wrong and your conclusions are wrong as they are based on erroneous analysis.
    I have to wonder how many of your other deeply held beliefs are equally based on bad data or incorrect analysis.


    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    How many acres did each take with them and was the land filled with other people?
    Last edited by Half Pint John; 10 Nov 18, 14:33.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

    Sounds like a safe bet. Also a stupid idea. What do the farmers do? Pack up their tractor and a couple hundred acres and go where? I think they would find most farm able land already taken
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Trek

    Precedence, John....

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    For example, in Arizona the wine industry is growing as fast as California's whine industry...
    CA wine has been establish for over a hundred years. I doubt it needs to grow. When I start seeing AZ wine over here then we can talk more about it. I really didn't know they could make wine from cactus juice.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
    Let them then. People are where they are for a reason. Why are you talking about grapes? The thread is about cages for chickens. That has zero effect on you.
    It's not like Arizona doesn't have chicken / egg production too... They could move here and sell in California.

    And, yes, chickens in cages that produce eggs and then become chicken meat don't bother me at all

    FARM ANIMALS ARE FOOD, NOT FRIENDS.

    Like Hickman egg production company:

    Leave a comment:


  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    If California keeps it up, they won't be for long. Given the ability to ship goods long distances today, agriculture will move elsewhere if it is unprofitable in California. Between silliness like this law, and things like cutting water to agriculture severely California is forcing farmers to move elsewhere.

    For example, in Arizona the wine industry is growing as fast as California's whine industry...



    Why suffer California's onerous laws and water shortages when you can grow equally good or better grapes in Arizona?
    Let them then. People are where they are for a reason. Why are you talking about grapes? The thread is about cages for chickens. That has zero effect on you.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
    California is the largest producer of produce in the nation. I doubt people are gonna go to middle America. Better weather in CA, more prosperity due to the progressive policies. There's a reason blue states and blue areas of states are always metropolitan and/or wealthy areas. Money is like a magnet to progressive policies. Same with presidencies.
    If California keeps it up, they won't be for long. Given the ability to ship goods long distances today, agriculture will move elsewhere if it is unprofitable in California. Between silliness like this law, and things like cutting water to agriculture severely California is forcing farmers to move elsewhere.

    For example, in Arizona the wine industry is growing as fast as California's whine industry...



    Why suffer California's onerous laws and water shortages when you can grow equally good or better grapes in Arizona?

    Leave a comment:


  • inevtiab1e
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    California has passed a law requiring all egg production be "cage free" by 2025. The law also requires specific larger cage sizes for calves and pigs.


    https://www.usnews.com/news/best-sta...gs-a-state-law

    Want to bet more farmers move out of California...
    California is the largest producer of produce in the nation. I doubt people are gonna go to middle America. Better weather in CA, more prosperity due to the progressive policies. There's a reason blue states and blue areas of states are always metropolitan and/or wealthy areas. Money is like a magnet to progressive policies. Same with presidencies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    They do, but their planning is different, their culture and social rules are designed for i, and it works well for them. Unlike America, their cities are not centers of decay, drugs and mindless violence which is what often drives Americans into the suburbs and then further into the country.
    Correct.

    What caused the decay in our Down Towns? My home town had a nice downtown with full fledged Market Halls, great stores and lousy parking. Sort of like Germany of today. Going from my home town it started with the first Mall, even though it was 13 miles outside of town. Then within the last twenty years they got the second Mall on the other side of town. You need a parking space...just go down town with all the vacant lots were prospering business use to be. It sucks

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Thing that drive property cost is of course population density. Germany has 82 million in the space of MT. 82 mil is more than NY, FL, TX and CA combined or close to it.
    They do, but their planning is different, their culture and social rules are designed for i, and it works well for them. Unlike America, their cities are not centers of decay, drugs and mindless violence which is what often drives Americans into the suburbs and then further into the country.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Thing that drive property cost is of course population density. Germany has 82 million in the space of MT. 82 mil is more than NY, FL, TX and CA combined or close to it.
    Only to a degree. Additional things that drive it are location, zoning and building regulations and restrictions, and tax burdens.

    Take Portland for example. They put building boundaries on the city. If you have property outside the boundaries, it is cheap because you can't build almost anything on it. If you are inside the boundary, your land is very expensive and valuable because growth has caused a massive reduction in available land for new construction.
    Zoning is the same way. If you have land zoned for agriculture, it is far less valuable than commercially zoned land.

    So, the artificialities that government puts on land use often have direct and serious impacts on that land's value.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Want to bet more farmers move out of California...
    Sounds like a safe bet. Also a stupid idea. What do the farmers do? Pack up their tractor and a couple hundred acres and go where? I think they would find most farm able land already taken

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X